Why Can't DC Get it right? - Part 2

[JtheDreamer]

He looked like the grumpiest, angriest Superman I've ever seen. Marvel got Cap right and that's how Superman should have been. A boy scout in a dark world.

No doubt. Supes was insufferable. It's amazing that they took an iconic superhero like that and made me loathe watching him, which then meant his death carried no weight.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Preach! Anyone who thinks what DCCU has done so far is acceptable is fooling themselves. Superman is not some angry guy who saves the world because he has to, he does it because he was raised to do the right thing. When Batman made the comment about Superman saving a cat, sorry I just can't see him doing it. He looked like the grumpiest, angriest Superman I've ever seen. Marvel got Cap right and that's how Superman should have been. A boy scout in a dark world.

I'm not sure what film you saw because BvS featured a contemplative Superman, but not an angry one. I remember him being much more short-tempered in "The Supergirl from Krypton" as he was being overprotective of Kara. Obviously, he's gone through many phases in 78 years worth of publication and he hasn't always been the grinning dork who gives impromptu lectures.

Batman, on the other hand, is an angry character at his very heart. Bruce Wayne's childhood outrage spawned his alter ego and his adult life has been fueled by that same fiery indignation. Yet he was translated into a lighthearted, goofy TV series to which people responded in the '60s and is still popular in some segments of Batman fandom today. If there is room in DC's history for something like West's Batman, there is certainly room for the more serious DCEU Superman.

 

[Saint]

He seems dispassionate about what he's doing.

This is the real killer for me. In MOS, at least, there were glimmers of a real, likable Superman inside what was, arguably appropriately, a lost and lonely character. Not only did he not grow into a recognizable Superman in BVS, but those glimmers were almost completely gone.

Writing a story where a character goes down an unfamiliar path of uncertainty (like Superman) or hate (like Batman) is fine. The fatal flaw of BVS is that the characters are overwhelmed to the point where uncertainty and hate become all that define them. It becomes impossible to see the real person as these characters are apparently so fragile that their ideals and personalities are completely washed away by circumstance.

The whole point of the film is when, at the end, their true selves are revealed--when Superman sacrifices himself and Batman's eyes are opened to his own descent into unreasoning cruelty. Except, these moments are hollow and contrived because the characters either never have the opportunity to show the audience what that "true self" really is because the movie is over (Superman), or their epiphanies are simply not enough to wash away the magnitude of their despicable actions (Batman).

I said in another thread recently that unlike the classic deconstructionist stories that Snyder wants to emulate, BVS really illuminates nothing new or interesting about these characters. Additionally, the deconstruction is so inept that when the film attempts to put the characters back together in the end, it fails.

 

[Marvin]

They *can*, but they don't want to. I think the core issue with that is that they don't like the character. My friends who dislike Superman LOVED Man of Steel. My friends who love Superman didn't. It was a film made by people who dislike Superman for the same such folks. And with a disliked protagonist, there is no passion. He doesn't get dialogue, because the person writing the dialogue doesn't care what he has to say. This is not to say it was a bad movie, but it's hard to make a great movie when you don't like the story you're adapting. For some, taking Superman 'down a peg' and making him not really very likable at all is incredibly cathartic, and makes them like him. Kinda like a Heel Turn in wrestling. Everyone loves Superman with a Heel Turn (Injustice, Red Son, DKR, you name it). But a Superman with a Heel Turn isn't really Superman anymore... and that, for good or ill, is the point.

Mark Waid wrote Kingdom Come.
I'm told he loves superman.

 

[Saint]

He doesn't get dialogue, because the person writing the dialogue doesn't care what he has to say.

Actually, I think the real reason Superman doesn't get much (meaningful) dialogue is because anything he could say would reveal his true character to Batman, and completely derail their conflict.

The senate committee hearing is the ultimate example. Superman walks in, and has the opportunity to address the world, to say what Superman would say, something that would reveal his basic humanity and humility--so they blow the damn place up, because they need Batman to legitimately try to murder this guy 30 minutes later.

It's why Superman's role is mainly one of inaction in this film. I really suspect the writers knew that the kind of action Superman would take would make it difficult for even their oafish, irrationally hateful version of Batman to want him dead.

 

[DrCosmic]

Mark Waid wrote Kingdom Come.
I'm told he loves superman.

Oh, I didn't mean to say that everyone who has written a heel Superman hates him, only that some of the appeal comes from wanting to see Superman go awry, to get an Uncle Ben killed, or at the very least "cut loose."

Actually, I think the real reason Superman doesn't get much (meaningful) dialogue is because anything he could say would reveal his true character to Batman, and completely derail their conflict.

The senate committee hearing is the ultimate example. Superman walks in, and has the opportunity to address the world, to say what Superman would say, something that would reveal his basic humanity and humility--so they blow the damn place up, because they need Batman to legitimately try to murder this guy 30 minutes later.

It's why Superman's role is mainly one of inaction in this film. I really suspect the writers knew that the kind of action Superman would take would make it difficult for even their oafish, irrationally hateful version of Batman to want him dead.

That accounts for some lack of dialogue in some key scenes, and I agree that plays a factor. But there were many scenes away from Bruce or cameras that wouldn't have impacted the story if he'd expressed some character verbally, but he still didn't.

 

[flickchick85]

At any rate, I don't consider Kingdom Come to be a "heel turn" version of Supes the way something like Red Son or DKR is.

 

[TheVileOne]

Oh, I didn't mean to say that everyone who has written a heel Superman hates him, only that some of the appeal comes from wanting to see Superman go awry, to get an Uncle Ben killed, or at the very least "cut loose."



That accounts for some lack of dialogue in some key scenes, and I agree that plays a factor. But there were many scenes away from Bruce or cameras that wouldn't have impacted the story if he'd expressed some character verbally, but he still didn't.

Like that scene on the farm in Kansas. In the theatrical cut he doesn't say anything. We don't even really see him going there.

That video about Snyder only going for moments was right. But it resulted in what felt like a lot of half scenes in the movie. Like we only get half the scene and don't understand what's going on.

I think there's a lot of reasons DC can't it right or why they are seemingly constantly scrambling to course correct. I think that's the problem. All this is happening in the scramble to try and catch up with Marvel and have their own Avengers.

The vision and will wasn't there. They are simply reacting to another studio's success and trying to imitate it.

 

[Marvin]

At any rate, I don't consider Kingdom Come to be a "heel turn" version of Supes the way something like Red Son or DKR is.

I didn't either, nor do I this current cinematic one is more the point. But a more introverted, less approachable and circumstance driven, (very) wrong choice making angry version of the character in a world full of death and loss but hope at the end by that of all writers says something. To some it says, dark and gritty can work if written 'well' I'm sure. To others it says simple, 'dark and gritty, mute, dispassion, angst...' aren't base criticisms to begin with, elaboration is key.

There is just something about the view of the cinematic that has doesn't allow for the leeway of an elseworlds, even though all of these adaptations are elseworlds almost by definition.
You have to get him "right", even more important in this realm then in the in continuity books I think. Perhaps this is only true with the bigger characters though.

Could they have gotten away with Millars Jingo cap though...
More pertinently, could they after what's been set now.

 

[sf2]

"Marvel makes human superhero, DC makes superhero human."

both are doing it right. it is just a matter of taste.

 

[sf2]

This is the real killer for me. In MOS, at least, there were glimmers of a real, likable Superman inside what was, arguably appropriately, a lost and lonely character. Not only did he not grow into a recognizable Superman in BVS, but those glimmers were almost completely gone.

Writing a story where a character goes down an unfamiliar path of uncertainty (like Superman) or hate (like Batman) is fine. The fatal flaw of BVS is that the characters are overwhelmed to the point where uncertainty and hate become all that define them. It becomes impossible to see the real person as these characters are apparently so fragile that their ideals and personalities are completely washed away by circumstance.

The whole point of the film is when, at the end, their true selves are revealed--when Superman sacrifices himself and Batman's eyes are opened to his own descent into unreasoning cruelty. Except, these moments are hollow and contrived because the characters either never have the opportunity to show the audience what that "true self" really is because the movie is over (Superman), or their epiphanies are simply not enough to wash away the magnitude of their despicable actions (Batman).

I said in another thread recently that unlike the classic deconstructionist stories that Snyder wants to emulate, BVS really illuminates nothing new or interesting about these characters. Additionally, the deconstruction is so inept that when the film attempts to put the characters back together in the end, it fails.

examples of showing the audience what that "true self" of superman and batman really are please? saving act? clarification speech?

 

[Anita18]

This is the real killer for me. In MOS, at least, there were glimmers of a real, likable Superman inside what was, arguably appropriately, a lost and lonely character. Not only did he not grow into a recognizable Superman in BVS, but those glimmers were almost completely gone.

Writing a story where a character goes down an unfamiliar path of uncertainty (like Superman) or hate (like Batman) is fine. The fatal flaw of BVS is that the characters are overwhelmed to the point where uncertainty and hate become all that define them. It becomes impossible to see the real person as these characters are apparently so fragile that their ideals and personalities are completely washed away by circumstance.

The whole point of the film is when, at the end, their true selves are revealed--when Superman sacrifices himself and Batman's eyes are opened to his own descent into unreasoning cruelty. Except, these moments are hollow and contrived because the characters either never have the opportunity to show the audience what that "true self" really is because the movie is over (Superman), or their epiphanies are simply not enough to wash away the magnitude of their despicable actions (Batman).

I said in another thread recently that unlike the classic deconstructionist stories that Snyder wants to emulate, BVS really illuminates nothing new or interesting about these characters. Additionally, the deconstruction is so inept that when the film attempts to put the characters back together in the end, it fails.

You know, I really can see that. I have a friend who is mentally ill and many times, her self-doubt, depression, and anger are all that define her. It's like she isn't even her own person then. But when she gets past that and gets excited about helping people, about sharing ideas, that's a real joy to see.

Bruce seems to enjoy a little of what he's doing in BvS, such as going undercover to sneak out information. But it definitely comes with an undercurrent of extreme paranoia. I can't really think of any moment in either MoS or BvS where Superman seems to enjoy what he's doing, aside from learning how to fly. Diana Prince, with her limited screentime, shows us some joy in battle, so at least we know she misses that, haha. Even then, we're still not sure exactly what makes her tick, but at least there's a glimmer there.

Someone becomes familiar to us when we know what they like, and what they don't like. We all know what Superman and Batman DON'T like (and are repeatedly bashed over the head with it), but we're not sure what they like.

 

[HaplessHenchman]

"Marvel makes human superhero, DC makes superhero human."

both are doing it right. it is just a matter of taste.

 

[writer0327]

"Marvel makes human superhero, DC makes superhero human."

both are doing it right. it is just a matter of taste.

It's art. Every film is a matter of taste. The question is why can't the DCEU seem to find the right balance between their art and critical acclaim, from not just film reviewers, but fans as well.

 

[dax]

You know, I really can see that. I have a friend who is mentally ill and many times, her self-doubt, depression, and anger are all that define her. It's like she isn't even her own person then. But when she gets past that and gets excited about helping people, about sharing ideas, that's a real joy to see.

Bruce seems to enjoy a little of what he's doing in BvS, such as going undercover to sneak out information. But it definitely comes with an undercurrent of extreme paranoia. I can't really think of any moment in either MoS or BvS where Superman seems to enjoy what he's doing, aside from learning how to fly. Diana Prince, with her limited screentime, shows us some joy in battle, so at least we know she misses that, haha. Even then, we're still not sure exactly what makes her tick, but at least there's a glimmer there.

Someone becomes familiar to us when we know what they like, and what they don't like. We all know what Superman and Batman DON'T like (and are repeatedly bashed over the head with it), but we're not sure what they like.

It's not that Superman doesn't enjoy saving people, he's just bummed that there are some people out there questioning his heroics like those political analysts on TV. There are even those who fear and distrust Superman to the point where they want to kill him like Batman and Lex Luthor. That is what bothers Superman because he's not given any love or appreciation like he would in the Christopher Reeve films but instead, he's been given the "X-Men" treatment by the very people he's helping.

 

[Predator jp]

It's not that Superman doesn't enjoy saving people, he's just bummed that there are some people out there questioning his heroics like those political analysts on TV. There are even those who fear and distrust Superman to the point where they want to kill him like Batman and Lex Luthor. That is what bothers Superman because he's not given any love or appreciation like he would in the Christopher Reeve films but instead, he's been given the "X-Men" treatment by the very people he's helping.

i think what he means is that they should've shown, at least once, Superman is enjoying what he's doing more clearly.

 

[Steamteck]

. My friends who dislike Superman LOVED Man of Steel. My friends who love Superman didn't. I

Then there are those of us who have been Superman fans for half a century who loved MOS.

 

[BH/HHH]

Then there are those of us who have been Superman fans for half a century who loved MOS.

Indeed, I've been a Superman fan for 27 years and I love MOS.

 

[Steamteck]

i think what he means is that they should've shown, at least once, Superman is enjoying what he's doing more clearly.

Ddin't you see that huge smile on his face as he saved the girl from the fire. It only changed when the crowd started their " touch the holy thing" routine on him.

 

[BH/HHH]

Ddin't you see that huge smile on his face as he saved the girl from the fire. It only changed when the crowd started their " touch the holy thing" routine on him.

Exactly but as with all the smiling in MOs people forget that. It also makes me laugh do they really think he should be t: when he's pulling a boat in or catching a rocket. It's just such an invalid complaint.

 

[BlZARRO]

I don't understand this obsession with "Superman enjoying" what he is doing. I mean, i'm pretty sure he likes to save people, but does he need to smile in order to prove that? Why smile when you're in a situation where people might be dying? The fact that heroes used to smile so much in comics has everything to do with the companies trying to sell these to children. It's easier to sell a nice smiling face to children than something depressing.

 

[The_Manhunter]

They have gotten it right.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

No doubt. Supes was insufferable. It's amazing that they took an iconic superhero like that and made me loathe watching him, which then meant his death carried no weight.

Agreed. Snyder not understand Superman or any of characters he use. He ruining Dceu. Suicide Squad bad too but his two movies even worse.

 

[AnneFan]

Indeed, I've been a Superman fan for 27 years and I love MOS.

I like it too. It would be easier to roll over and say 'Snyder not understand Superman or any character he use' around here at times, but that's not how I feel. So the back and forth continues. I find people usually seek to validate their opinion with consensus to 'prove' things and make themselves feel better. I can just like something and be okay with that. Wanting a good box office is essential if you want continued projects, so there's the difference. And no matter what is said, the DCEU is banking money.

 

[Saint]

Indeed, I've been a Superman fan for 27 years and I love MOS.

I don't really like MOS, but I really like some of the glimmers I see in it. Every now and then, the right line, or the right little smile from Cavill, and I really see Superman in that movie. Not often, but not never.

I think that film, with a few small adjustments, could have been great. I remember saying, at the time, that although I was disappointed, I wanted to see a sequel because I felt there was potential for a better film in the universe they built. There was stuff that worked (especially the cast).

Imagine my frustration when BVS took all the things about MOS that I felt didn't work, and doubled down on them...